| By Jesus» day, however, a nearer context for a Galilean teacher was certainly early Judaism, and whatever the measure of Greek influence on its preference for the language, its most direct source was the Hebrew Bible. The Hebrew Bible recognized God as Israel " s father by adoption in redemption 7904 and Jewish literature in general continued this tradition (e.g., Wis 2:16; 3Macc 5:7; 7:6). Jewish literature regularly calls God Israel " s (occasonally in Diaspora Judaism, humanity " s) «father.» 7905 Jewish tradition also employed this biblical image in prayer, though in a relatively restrained manner (3Macc 6:8). 7906 The form of synagogue Judaism we know from later rabbinic literature commonly calls God «our Father in heaven,» 7907 as scholars conversant in the material regularly point out. 7908 But even Jewish texts not intended for corporate use only rarely designate God as personally «my Father,» 7909 whereas Jesus nearly ahvays did. 7910 Matthew and John, the most explicitly Jewish of the extant gospels, also emphasize Jesus» use of «Father» most frequently. But while «Father» should be clear to John " s primarily Jewish audience and its peripheral Gentile adherents, the titlés significance should have been lost on anyone in the story world. For John, their failure to understand emphasizes their denseness, and appears to stem from a failure to believe. The voice came for their sakes (12:30; cf. 11:42); Jesus did not doubt his own identity (11:42), but they needed testimony and signs to believe (5:34; 10:38). Now the climactic time of Jesus» glorification had come; at the very point where the world system would seem to crush Jesus (12:32–33), the spiritual ruler of the world would be convicted and cast out (12:31). 2D. Judgment on the World " s Ruler (12:31) Jesus came not to judge the world (3:17; 12:47), but the moment of judgment nevertheless arrived in him. The world " s judgment was at hand: the context is Jesus going to the cross (12:32–33); that judgment was coming «now» (12:31) revealed the eschatological significance of the cross in history (cf. 12:27; 13:31, 36; 16:5, 22; 17:5, 13). Jesus» death signaled defeat for the «prince of the world» (12:31; cf. 14:30; 16:11). Another document probably circulating in the same circle of believers as this Gospel depicts Satan being «cast out» from heaven in strikingly similar language, at the time of Jesus» exaltation (possibly on the cross; Rev 12:4, 9). |
| 1096 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 106–7, surveys contemporary Jewish texts in which repentance and eschatology occur together (cf. 92 for John the Baptist); cf. also 1 En. 50:3–5 (in the Similitudes, of uncertain date); Pss. So1. 9:7; T. Ab. 10:14A; 11:10B; m. «Abot 2:10; Yoma 8:8; t. Kip. 4:7; »Abot R. Nat. 39A-40; 15,29, §62B; b. Šabb. 153a; Roš Haš. 16b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 3:2, and often in rabbinic literature (where repentance makes one right before the Judge). 1097 Philosophers could describe such a change by other means (Cicero Tusc. 3.27.58), while using this specific term rarely (e.g., Marcus Aurelius 8.10). John " s regeneration language ( John 1:12, 3:3–5 ) indicates the radical transformation of conversion. 1098 See also the conclusions of Hengel, «Throngemeinschaft,» who compares Revelation " s Christology with that of the Gospel and 1 John. 1099 Some commentators think that the emperor was worshiped as Apollo, son of Zeus, in Thyatira (Fiorenza, Revelation, 193); others associate the two (Caird, Revelation, 43, based on numismatic evidence). 1100 The association with a paschal lamb is clear, since his blood delivers his people (7:3) from participation in the plagues. 1101 This was associated with Torah (Sipre Deut. 47.3.2; b. " Abot 6:7; Lev. Rab. 9:3, 25:1, 35:6; Num. Rab. 13:12; Ecc1. Rab. 1.4, §4; also Targumim according to McNamara, Targum, 121) because of its identification with Wisdom in Prov 3:18 . The imagery can be explained without recourse to Torah associations, however (e.g., Prov 11:30; 13:12; 15:4; 4 Macc 18:16; Pss. So1. 14:3–4; in Rev 22:2, Gen 2is explicitly in view), where the end time includes a restored beginning-time paradise, as in some other apocalyptic texts (4 Ezra 8:52; Gk. Apoc. Ezra 2:11; 5:21). 1102 The light in Revelation is probably eschatological, cf. Isa 58:8–10, 60:1–3; Wis 3:7–8, 5:6; 1QM 1.8; 1QH 18.28–29; 1 En. 1:8; 39:7; 50:1; 51:5; 58:2–6; 91:16; 96:3; 108:11–15; 2 En. 65:10; 65A; 3 En. 5:3; 4 Ezra 7:39–44,97; 2 Bar. 10:12; Sib. Or. 2.329 (probably Christian redaction); 4.190–192; in rabbinic literature, cf. Sipre Deut. 47.2.1–2; b. Sank. 100a; and Ya1. Ps. 72 in Abelson, Immanence, 89. On different applications of light imagery, see our commentary on John 1:4–5 , below. |
| 6 Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Universe According to Maximus the Confessor, San Francisco, 1988, p. 172. 7 “Χσμα γρ ς ληθς φοβερν τε κα μγα μεταξ θεο κα νθρπων στν” S. Maximus Abbas, Ambigua to John, in: J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus (Tomus 90, Paris: Garnier Fratres, 1865), col. 1172 Α). The term χσμα was used yet by the ancient authors in the sense of the “Tartar” (Gesiod, Evripidis) (see Liddel, Scott). Christian authors used it in the sense of an abyss or tartar, and in the exegetics as a term to denote the abyss between the rich man and Lazarus ( Lk.16:26 ) (st. Gregory of Nissa, st. John Chrysostom), sometimes as a gap between good and evil, virtue and vice. Only once St. Gregory the Theologian is employing the term(according to the TLG data) to denote the ontological gap between God and men. St. Maximos is following in this usage St.Gregory (Ambigua to John, T.91, col.1413A). 8 Thus, for example, Lossky defines them as “first causes, which are in fact God’s ideas-volitions, contained in His energies” (Lossky V.N., The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, SVS Press, 1997; Russian tr. Moscow, 1991, p. 76). Rev. Andrew Louth rejects the direct connection of these two notions in the heritage of st. Maximos “‘Logoi’ are in fact the will of God and predestinations ... they are not to be considered as ontological realities” (Louth A., rev., St.Maximus’ Doctrine of the logoi of Creation, Studia Patristica, vol.48, Leuven, 2010, p.82). 9 S. Maximus Abbas, Capita Theologica et Oecumenica 2.10, in: J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus (Tomus 90, Paris: Garnier Fratres, 1865), col. 1129А. 11 S. Maximus Abbas, Ambiguorum Liber, in: J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus (Tomus 91, Paris: Garnier Fratres, 1865), col. 1312 D. 12 S. Maximus Abbas, Quaestiones et Dubia, in Corpus Christianorum. Series Graeca (Vol. 10, Edidit Jose H. Declerck, Brepols-Turnhout: Leuven University Press, 1982), q. 18. 13 S. Maximus Abbas, Ambiguorum Liber, in: J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus (Tomus 91, Paris: Garnier Fratres, 1865), col. 1305 В. |
| 7589 1 Th 4:13; Acts 7:60; Rev 14:13; Sir 30:17 ; Jub. 23:1; 36:18; 1 En. 89:38; Pss. So1. 2:31; L.A.B. 3:10; 4Ezra7:31–32;2Bar. 11:4;21:25; 36:11; T.Mos. 10:14; L.A.E.48:2; T.Dan 7:1; T. Iss. 7:9; T.Zeh. 10:6; Gen. Rah. 62:2. 7590 E.g., Sophocles Oed. co1. 1578; Callimachus Epigrams 11, 18; Plutarch Apol1. 12, Mor. 107D; Propertius Eleg. 2.28.25; Diogenes Laertius 1.86; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 3.6. See also in unrelated societies (Mbiti, Religions, 204–5). 7592 E.g., Chariton 5.5.5–6; for such an announcement that one was dead, Plutarch Cimon 18.7. An orator sometimes intended an audience to take his words the opposite of the way he put them (Cicero Or. Brut. 40.137), but this was irony, not deliberate obscurity. 7593 Sleep allows respite from pain (Sophocles Track 988–991); conversely, loss of sleep can hasten death (Livy 40.56.9) or illness (Livy 22.2.11); one could be tortured to death by lack of sleep (Aulus Gellius 7.4.4; Cicero Pis. 19.43; Valerius Maximus 9.2.axf.l). Lack of sleep could stem from self-discipline (Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.64.2; Livy 23.18.12; Silius Italicus 9.4–5), devotion to Torah ( Ps 119:55, 148 ; 1QS 6.7–8), or repentance (Jos. Asen. 18MSS); sickness (Hippocrates Regimen in Acute Diseases 1–2; Prorrhetic 1.135–136; love-sickness (Achilles Tatius 1.6; PGM 101.5–7), jealousy (Plutarch Themistocles 3.3–4), fear (Publilius Syrus 359; Plutarch Alex. 31.4; Silius Italicus 13.256–257), anxiety caused by vice (Plutarch Virt. 2, Mor. 100F), or other anxiety (Homer Il. 2.2–3; Aristophanes Lys. 27; Livy 40.56.9; Plutarch Cicero 35.3); mourning (Homer Il. 24.4–6); idleness during the day (m. Abot 3:4); or hardships (Arrian Ind. 34.7; Gen 31:40 ; perhaps 2Cor 11:27 ; Chariton 1.2.3). 7594 In 11δοκω (here the aorist δοξαν) signifies misunderstanding, as it always does in John (5:39,45; 13:29; 16:2; 20:15), including in this context (11:31, 56). 7595 Bernard, John, 2:380, suggests that Jesus " joy relates to fulfilling his mission (cf. 4:36; 15:11; 17:13). |
| In the Q traditions Jesus portrays himself not as a mere human teacher but as judge in the day of judgment who will be addresses as «Lord, Lord» (Matt 7:21–23; Luke 13:25). Even John the Baptist recognizes the coming one as greater than a merely human, natural messiah or teacher. He presents him as one whose sandals he was unworthy to unloose or carry (Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7 ; Luke 3:16)–that is, as one whose servant he is unworthy to be (see commentary on John 1:27 ). This supernatural figure would not baptize in mere water, but in the Spirit of God; he would perform the divine role of judge, separating the righteous for eternal life and the wicked for damnation (Matt 3:10–12; Luke 3:9, 16–17). If Matthew and Luke believed Jesus to be merely a natural messiah, they did an inexplicably sloppy job of editing Q. Early Christian writers preferred to make their case through a variety of images rather than to focus on answering a small number of precise christological questions no one was yet asking in this century; but these images from the start include a superhuman role beneath the authority of the Father. 3B. Diverse but Complementary Christologies There is, in fact, little evidence for any strands of early Christianity that did not recognize Jesus as deity; the usual view of Christological development rests on speculation concerning the way views should have developed, rather than on the evidence of early Christian texts themselves. Although Wisdom Christology by itself could portray Jesus» divinity in a merely Arian sense (to borrow the later description), various NT writers modified such Christology by portraying Jesus as the divine Lord, often applying to him OT and Jewish language and imagery for YHWH (cf., e.g., 8:58; Mark 1:3 ; Acts 2:21, 38; Rom 9:5; 10:9–13 ; 1Cor 8:6 ; Phil 2:6,9–11 ; Rev 1:17; 2:8; 22:12–13). Neither John nor other first-century Christians felt constrained to distinguish Wisdom and divine Christologies; they adapted both by adding them together, coming to understand Israel " s one God as a composite unity. Interestingly, however, they did avoid the later Jewish-Christian compromise of an angel Christology. 2650 Neither Gal 4:14 2651 nor 1 Thess 4:16 2652 actually teaches it, though Michael is the most likely guess, if any, 2653 for the «archangel» of the latter text, 2654 being the most common archangel in early Jewish texts ( Dan 10:13,21; 12:1 ). 2655 Further, Col 1:16; 2:8–11,18; 2656 and Heb 2:5–16 2657 may effectively polemicize against the temptation of an angel Christology. |
| 6949 In the Scrolls, overseers should be between thirty and fifty (CD 14.8–9); Buchanan, «Age,» cites also lQSa 1.13–21. This was the age range for temple service ( Num 4:35 ; cf. 8:24; t. Šeqa1. 3:26); thirty (Luke 3:23) held wider precedent as a transition age ( Gen 41:46 ; 2Sam 5:4 ; Gaius Inst. 1.20); forty was the minimum for a chorgos so that he could be trusted not to corrupt children (Aeschines Timarchus 11–12). 6950 Or at least surprise (Philostratus Hrk. 21.6). 6951 On controversia, see Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 88 (Quintilian 9.2.65–95). 6952 E.g., T. Job 27:2/3 (of Satan); an angelic annunciation in Tob 12:15; T. Ab. 16:11; 17:5A; 13(Death). 6953 E.g., Τ Job 29:4; 31:6/7. 6954 See Painter, John, 37–38; cf. Rabiej, «Jestem»; Probst, «Jésus»; Gwynne, «Invisible Father»; Okorie, «Self-Revelation.» 6955 «I am» appears predicatively in divine (Rev 1:8; 21:6) and equivalent christological (1:17; 2:23; 22:16) speech in Revelation, but never absolutely (Hill, Prophecy, 81). 6956 E.g., Nicholson, Death, 112–13. 6957 E.g., ibid., 112–13; Pancaro, Law, 60; Bell, I Am, 195–98. Some (e.g., Schnackenburg, John, 2:88) take this only as a claim that God utters himself through Jesus the eschatological revealer. 6958 Cf. Harner, I Am, 49–50, noting the use of the definite article in these predicate nominatives despite its relative rareness in Greek. 6959 See further Reinhartz, Word, 34–35. 6960 See most fully Bell, I Am, 27–32. 6961 E.g., Betz and Smith, «De Iside,» 45; Kysar, Maverick Gospel, 42. Some (e.g., Aune, Environment, 52) acknowledge Hermetic and gnostic parallels, but these may depend on Johns language. 6962 Horsley, Documents, 1:19–20, §2; Boring et a1., Commentary, 272–73; Kee, Origins, 62, comparing Isis with the figure of Wisdom; more extensively, Kee, «Isis.» 6963 CIJ 2:54, §802: γ εμι μγας èv ορανω καθμενος. 6964 Carson, John, 58 n. 1. 6965 See Aune, Prophecy, 41,65, and esp. 71. 6966 See in fuller detail Harner, I Am, 18–21 (also, e.g., Pesiq. Rab. 33:7–8); against a Hellenistic origin, see ibid., 26–30. Those who cite Hellenistic backgrounds usually also recognize the Jewish background (Kysar, Maverick Gospel, 43). |
| 675 In both, the Isaiah text indicates that Jesus» word hardens the stubborn. On the text in Mark, cf. Evans, «Note.» 676 For esoteric teachings, cf., e.g., 4 Ezra 14:45–47; t. Hag. 2:1; b. Hag. 13a-14b; Pesah. 119a; Šabb. 80b; p. Hag. 2:1, §§3–4; for other private teachings or those understood only within wisdom circles, cf., e.g., Ps.-Phoc. 89–90; various Qumran texts (lQpHab 7.4–5; 1QH 2.13–14; 9.23–24; 11.9–10, 16–17; 12.11–13; 13.13–14; 1QS 8.12; 9.17–19; cf. 1QS 8.1–2; 11.5; 1QM 17.9); Gen. Rab. 8:9; Num. Rab. 9:48; 19(purportedly from ben Zakkai); Pesiq. Rab. 21:2/3; 22:2; perhaps Wis 2:21–22; 7:21; 2 Bar. 48:3; b. Sukkah 49b. In Pythagoreanism, cf. Diogenes Laertius 8.1.15; perhaps Plato in Diogenes Laertius 3.63; others in Eunapius Lives 456. Cf. also the passing on of esoteric books from Moses to Joshua in Γ. Mos. 1(possibly early first century C.E.). 677 Bruce, Documents, 57. Cf. Stein, Method, 27–32. By itself this would not demand authenticity. Goulder, Midrash, 89–92, thinks that Jesus gave some teaching in poetry but Matthew created it in many additional sayings. 678 «Amen» normally confirmed prayers, oaths, curses, or blessings. The Gospel usage in confirming Jesus» words as he speaks them is rare (against Jeremias, Theology, 35,79, it is not unique; see Aune, Prophecy, 165; Hill, Prophecy, 64–66); it is almost certainly authentic (with Aune; Hill; Burkitt, Sources, 18). (Boring, Sayings, 132–33, thinks it continued in early Christian prophetic usage, but even Rev 2–3 avoids it). Cf. Gen 18:13 . 679 Bruce, Documents, 57–58. The introductory «amen» appears about 30 times in Matthew, 13 in Mark, 6 in Luke, and 50 in John (Smith, Parallels, 6). The double form appears rarely, e.g., in the current text of L.A.B. 22:6 (the answer of the people to Joshuás words); 26(response to Kenaz " s curse invocation); PGM 22b.21, 25 (closing an invocation); and as an oath formula in p. Qidd. 1:5, §8. Culpepper, «Sayings,» argues that the double amen sayings in John frequently (though not always) reflect historical material, often «core sayings that generate the dialogue or discourse material that follows» (100). |
| 10172 4 Macc 15:30; Aristotle Po1. 3.2.10, 1277b; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 4.82.3; 6.92.6; Diodorus Siculus 5.32.2; 10.24.2; Livy 2.13.6; 28.19.13; Appian R.H. 2.5.3; 7.5.29; Iamblichus V.P. 31.194. Some philosophers held that women were capable of courage (Musonius Rufus 4, p. 48.8 and that philosophy improved women " s courage (3, p. 40.33–35). 10173 2Macc 7:21; 4 Macc 15:23; 16:14; Diodorus Siculus 17.77.1; 32.10.9; Apuleius Metam. 5.22. «Courage» is literally «manliness» (e.g., 1Macc 2:64; Aristotle E.E. 3.1.2–4, 1228ab; Dio Cassius 58.4.6; Diodorus Siculus 17.45.6; 40.3.6; Theon Progymn. 9.22; Crates Ep. 19; Chariton 7.1.8). 10174 E.g., Homer I1. 7.96; 8.163; 11.389; 16.7–8; Virgil Aen. 9.617; 12.52–53; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.7.2; 10.28.3; Diodorus Siculus 12.16.1; 34/35.2.22; Aulus Gellius 17.21.33; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.46; cf. an unarmed man in Homer I1. 22.124–125; an effeminate man in Aristophanes Lys. 98. 10176 Mothers (Homer I1. 22.79–90,405–407; Euripides Supp1. 1114–1164) mourned sons; see especially a mother " s mourning the death of the son who would have solaced her in old age (e.g., Virgil Aen. 9.481–484; Luke 7:12–13). 10177 It may support an identification with the disciple of 18:15–16. The disciple perhaps departs in 19:27, «to his own» (Michaels, John, 319). 10178 Hoskyns, «Genesis,» 211–13; Ellis, Genius, 271; cf. Peretto, «Maria.» The specific meaning in Rev 12 is clearer, but even there the mariological reading is unclear unless one resorts to subsequent tradition; cf., e.g., Keener, Revelation, 313–14, 325–27. 10180 Cf. Moloney, «Mary.» Boguslawski, «Mother,» sees this new «eschatological family» confirmed by the coming of the Spirit in 19:30. 10183 Witherington, Women, 95. Cf. Jesus» mother as an example of discipleship also in Seckel, «Mère.» 10184 For care of parents in their old age, see P.Enteux. 26 (220 B.C.E.); Hierocles Parents 4.25.53; Diogenes Laertius 1.37; Quintilian 7.6.5; Sir 3:16 ; Gen. Rab. 100:2. Some texts view such care as «repayment» of parents (Homer Ii. 4.477–478; 17.302; 1Tim 5:4 ; possibly Christian interpolation in Sib. Or. 2.273–275). More generally on honor of parents, see comment on 2:4. |
| 5885 Sib. Or. frg. 7. 5886 Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.167. 5887 Alexander son of Numenius Rhetores graeci 3.4–6 (Grant, Religions, 166); PGM 13.843; Iamblichus Myst. 7.2. The highest good had to be self-sufficient (Aristotle N.E. 1.7,1097B). 5888 E.g., Aristotle Heav. 1.9, 279a.l l-b.3; Pyth. Sent. 25; Marcus Aurelius 7.16; Plutarch Isis 75, Mor. 381B; Maximus of Tyre Or. 38.6; in Jewish sources, Let. Aris. 211; 3Macc 2:9; Josephus Ant. 8.111; Ag. Ap. 2.190; Philo Creation 100; Acts 17:25. On sources of Philós portrait of God " s transcendence, see Dillon, «Transcendence.» 5889 E.g., 2 Bar. 21:10; Pesiq. Rab. 1:2; «who lives forever» (e.g., Tob 13:1, ζν …); for the " liv-ing God,» cf., e.g., Marmorstein, Names, 72; Rev 7:2; also Deut 5:26 ; Josh 3:10; 1Sam 17:26,36; 2 Kgs 19:4, 16; Ps 42:2; 84:2 ; Isa 37:4,17; Jer 10:10; 23:36 ; Dan 6:20, 26 ; Hos 1:10 ; Matt 16:16; 26:63; Acts 14:15; Rom 9:26 ; 2Cor 3:3; 6:16; 1 Thess 1:9; 1Tim 3:15; 4:10 ; Heb 3:12; 9:14; 10:31; 12:22. 5890 Tob 13:1,6; 1Tim 1:17 ; 1 En. 5:1; 25:3,5; Sib. Or. 1.45,50,53,56,73,122,152,167,232; 3.10, 276, 278, 302, 328, 582, 593, 600–601, 604, 617, 628, 631, 698, 717; 8.428; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.167; Philo Creation 100; Good Person 20; Ps.-Phoc. 17; T. Ab. 15:15A; 2Bar. 21:10; CI] 1:489, §677; cf. Plutarch Isis 1, Mor. 351E; PGM 13.843. 5891 Sib. Or. 3.15–16; cf. Plutarch Ε at Delphi 17, Mor. 392A. 5892 PGM 4.640–645 (Betz, Papyri, 50). 5893 To others God commits temporary, limited political authority (19:11) or the authority to become his children (1:12), but only to Jesus does God entrust authority over all humanity (17:2). 5894 For refutation, see Brown, John, 1:215, whom we follow here. 5895 For the admonition not to marvel along with provision of evidence, cf. 3:7–8; probably 6:61–62; for the principle, see Mark 2:9–11 . 5896 E.g., Apocr. Ezek. introduction. 5897 Also, e.g., Hanson, Gospel 52. 5898 Bailey, Poet, 62, sees a chiastic structure, but if one is present, it is highly asymmetrica1. |
| Farewell speeches often included warnings (e.g., Josephus Ant. 4.177–193), but like some other early Christian examples of this genre (e.g., Mark 13 ; Acts 20:28–31), the words of warning in 15:18–25 reflect the traditional apocalyptic perspective of suffering before the end. The Gospel " s emphasis on realized eschatology underlines the immediacy of the eschatological situation of tribulation; one may also compare the similar result of imminent eschatology in the book of Revelation. 1A. Part of the Context Some argue that the focus of 15:18–16is quite different from ch. 14; 9113 certainly the focus moves from the relationship of believers with God and one another (13:31–15:17) to the relationship of believers to hostile society. Yet one need not view 15:18–16:4 as an independent discourse formed under circumstances distinct from the rest of the Gospel; 9114 the Gospel as a whole is basically consistent in its dualism (see introduction). 1B. The Worldview of the Passage The worldview presupposed in 15:18–25 is one common to sectarian groups, in which apocalyptic ideologies (in the modern sense of that expression) often prevai1. Some early Christian writers, such as Luke, seem to represent a socioeconomic stratum and social conditions that provide more optimism for engaging the broader culture from a Christian perspective. Thus Acts includes eschatology (1:11; 3:19–21; 10:42; 17:31; 24:15; 26:6–8) but focuses more on the current mission (1:6–8); one finds favorable and just officials (5:34; 10:4; 13:7; 18:12–16; 19:31; 22:29; 23:9, 23–24; 25:25; 26:31–32; 27:43) and others (e.g., 28:2,10,21). John, however, expects his audience to view the world as hostile, with a perspective comparable to other Johannine literature (1 John 2:15–17; 4:4–5; 5:19; Rev 13:7–17). 9115 This admittedly characterized also those who, while working within society, shared an apocalyptic worldview ( Rom 12:2; 13:11–12 ; 1Cor 10:11 ; Gal 1:4; 2 Thess 2:1–13). 9116 Such hostility from the out-group would also help define the boundaries and strengthen cohesiveness of the in-group. 9117 |
|
|
